AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › Can YOU hear the difference between amplifiers??
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Can YOU hear the difference between amplifiers?? - Page 7  

Poll Results: Can you hear the difference between amplifiers?

 
  • 22% (35)
    1 - Absolutely
  • 30% (47)
    2 - Generally Yes
  • 9% (15)
    3 - Undecided...
  • 19% (30)
    4 - Doubtful but perhaps
  • 17% (27)
    5 - Absolutely Not
154 Total Votes  
post #181 of 433
11/21/12 at 9:37pm
I suppose one can hear what they want to hear....or not hear what is there. Blind tests should demonstrate a difference. Where are these tests?

It is (still) a free country. Buy what you wish and enjoy what you buy. If you believe you hear a 3D soundstage with expensive components and cables then enjoy it. I have yet to hear one even with very high end gear so I am quite satisfied with my Low Hi equipment...it works as well as I need it to work.

AVS Top Picks

post #182 of 433
11/22/12 at 12:25am
OT:
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveR1952 View Post

Agree on the cable and interconnects having very little effect on the final sound you hear. If so called "high end" cables really made a difference one would think some decent engineer could measure some aspect that makes one cable "better" than another.
The only real caveat is the cable must be manufactured with good connections and be adequately shielded. The rest is pixy dust and marketing hyperbole.

Its been established knowledge (measurements) that some of the so called "HighEnd" cables are detrimental to the signal quality because of their high impedance (heavy capacitance or inductance or both).
They will really alter the sound in combination with the speaker and source impedance in such a way as any technical inferior cable product will do. As such "HighEnd" in this case technically rather means "LowEnd" rolleyes.gif
Pretty packaging, expensive looks and some semi-scientific wording and matching "theory / hypothesis" are all that is needed to steer some "believers" in the proposed direction.
They finally will "hear" all the proposed "positive" effects although all they probably hear is some rather small difference due to the (sometimes) inferior cable technology.
Cable technology is no black art because all relevant parameters can easily be measured and evaluated (since "ages" rolleyes.gif).
Audio signals are rather lo tech in terms of technical challenges being only in the vicinity of 10 Hz - 50 kHz (even 200 kHz). No relevant skin effects no nothing, really, just simple impedance.
/OT
Edited by gurkey - 11/22/12 at 2:25am
post #183 of 433
11/22/12 at 2:26am
No two things in this world are the same, with properly design test equipment and the correct method will able to measured the difference.
Therefore, a working (trained) ear and a functional brain will enable one to hear more deviation.
post #184 of 433
11/22/12 at 2:29am
I'd suggest ignoring the trolls in this thread, or keep having fun with it tongue n cheek.
post #185 of 433
11/22/12 at 2:55am
Quote:
Originally Posted by dwong View Post

No two things in this world are the same, with properly design test equipment and the correct method will able to measured the difference.
Therefore, a working (trained) ear and a functional brain will enable one to hear more deviation.

One never really knows, if the last two things mentioned are really working the way they are supposed to and how they cooperate rolleyes.gifbiggrin.gif
Edited by gurkey - 11/22/12 at 3:51am
post #186 of 433
11/22/12 at 3:02am
Quote:
Originally Posted by gurkey View Post

One never really knows, if the last two things mentioned are really working the way they are supposed to rolleyes.gifbiggrin.gif

bipolared facts cause that.
this place looks like a clubhouse about to pour into the street and nail the doors shut.
post #187 of 433
11/22/12 at 9:54am
OK..OK..I guess this thread is about amps...so I will stop talking about I.c....speaker cable..and power cords...its just that....oh forget it..lol
Yes...power amps do sound different from one another..but you have to remember...a very very slight difference can be a huge difference to a critical listener....its like finding that perfect sound quality that suits your taste..and nobody else's...amps are like cars...they all get you where your going..but some ride smoother, stop better,handle the curves better ..etc
Its just nice to see so many people on these threads...this is a great hobby that brings us closer to our music and movies...all of us have different taste and believes and there's no wrong or right..we just have to enjoy what we hear!...I'm picking up a new bluray player soon..trying to decide on the marantz ud5007 or the new oppo 103..bluray playback only..nothing else..anybody got a suggestion for me?...by the way. Happy thanksgiving..now let's give thanks to all our audio equipment..Lil
post #188 of 433
11/22/12 at 10:49am
Quote:
Originally Posted by dwong View Post

No two things in this world are the same, with properly design test equipment and the correct method will able to measured the difference.
Therefore, a working (trained) ear and a functional brain will enable one to hear more deviation.

That would appear to be a non sequitur.

Just because things measure different doesn't mean that they necessarily sound different.
post #189 of 433
11/22/12 at 4:25pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by esh516 View Post

...amps are like cars...

I suppose we all love amps and cars especially when they love us back but with the human experience factored out they don't seem to me to have much in common except:

http://delphi.com/manufacturers/auto/hevevproducts/inverters/traction/

http://www.eetimes.com/design/automotive-design/4004694/Special-Issue-Inside-the-Toyota-Prius-Part-5--Inverter-converter-is-Prius-power-broker

Like amps, power inverters use transformers, semiconductors, and a control signal to produce AC, and they generate heat. In the amp's case, the load is the speaker and in the car's case, the load is an AC motor.

With the human experience factored back in and considering that most cars still run on fuel I'd say that cars have more in common with musicians than amps.
post #190 of 433
11/22/12 at 6:05pm
I think the main job of an AVR is to pass the sound from the player to the speakers as accurately as possible. Assuming no EQ or matrixing his happening, all AVR's should essentially pass sound from the playing equipment equally well, the main limitations being how much power they can contribute to each speaker and the THD of the individual AVR. Do we agree that of modern AVR's, the usual THD is low enough that it is unnoticeable by human hearing?

Assuming the above, there should be little difference between each AVR beyond the obvious clipping from pouring too much power to too many speakers.

So why purchase more expensive AVR over a cheaper one if this is the case? Because more expensive means more features, more power to drive more speakers louder, more advanced/better EQ/Room Correction/Calibration algorithms built in. All of which goes into (hopefully) improved sound quality and more enveloping surround experiences.

If all you want is an AVR that can pass the music as accurately as possible through your speakers and are not worried about surround sound matrixing, room correction or any of the extra features that come with an AVR, you are probably fine with an inexpensive AVR that has enough power to drive your speakers (which if you are going for sound quailty will be more expensive and very efficient, making it easy for any modern AVR to drive them). However, if you want a theatrical-like surround sound experience, or are into Multi-channel music, then you probably want a somewhat more expensive AVR with enough power to drive 5 to 7 speakers and more advanced room correction software and enhanced matrixing capability (to matrix 5.1 to 7.1 or more).

Why are people arguing about the sound quality of various AVR's when all the information i've ever read say it is probably the least contributing factor to sound quality of all factors considered?
post #191 of 433
11/22/12 at 10:58pm
Its probably not only the amps but the processing, which will differentiate the AVRs.
AVRs are more of a multi media computer nowadays, and we really don't know for sure, how much of that processing influences the SQ of such a unit, no matter, what the manufacturers say.
Another relevant point is, how sophisticated the built in room correction system is and how good a job it does.
post #192 of 433
11/23/12 at 2:14am
Well, I'm sure it has already been said and discussed, but shouldn't we actually only talk about the amp side of things?

I mean, a AVR is a device which acts as a switch box of multiple sources (hdmi, analog inputs, optical, etc), as a DAC, as an equalizer and, finally, as an AMP. I'd say that it should be possible to hear differences between different AVRs. But, talking strictly about the AMP side of things.. I'm not so sure.

Simplifying things, and AMP turns a low power signal into a big power signal one. Ideally, when comparing those signals, you'd see exactly the same signal but scaled by an amount. Of course, ideally doesn't exist, so some imperfections will be present in the amplified signal that aren't present in the original one and that kind of errors could be different from one AMP to another one. So, can those errors be heard and clearly differentiate an amp from another? That's another story... Nowadays, power amplifying has come a long way and doing an amp that behaves well should be fairly easy, of course, as you turn the volume higher, more power is used and more critical it gets... but I'd say that hearing a difference between amps (assuming a minimum of quality!) at average listen levels should be quite difficult, if not impossible.

At the end, we are only turning a small figure into a big one, and 2 quality amps should produce the same "nearly perfect" scaled figure. A bad amp can surely behave different and introduce hearable errors, but I don't think that there's a point comparing a $50 amps with $1000 one, or is there?
post #193 of 433
11/23/12 at 2:46am
Quote:
Originally Posted by PatrickVogeli View Post

Well, I'm sure it has already been said and discussed, but shouldn't we actually only talk about the amp side of things?

I mean, a AVR is a device which acts as a switch box of multiple sources (hdmi, analog inputs, optical, etc), as a DAC, as an equalizer and, finally, as an AMP. I'd say that it should be possible to hear differences between different AVRs. But, talking strictly about the AMP side of things.. I'm not so sure.

Simplifying things, and AMP turns a low power signal into a big power signal one. Ideally, when comparing those signals, you'd see exactly the same signal but scaled by an amount. Of course, ideally doesn't exist, so some imperfections will be present in the amplified signal that aren't present in the original one and that kind of errors could be different from one AMP to another one. So, can those errors be heard and clearly differentiate an amp from another? That's another story... Nowadays, power amplifying has come a long way and doing an amp that behaves well should be fairly easy, of course, as you turn the volume higher, more power is used and more critical it gets... but I'd say that hearing a difference between amps (assuming a minimum of quality!) at average listen levels should be quite difficult, if not impossible.

At the end, we are only turning a small figure into a big one, and 2 quality amps should produce the same "nearly perfect" scaled figure. A bad amp can surely behave different and introduce hearable errors, but I don't think that there's a point comparing a $50 amps with $1000 one, or is there?

We are generally in agreement but I would change your last sentence to 'I don't think there's a point in comparing a poor amp with a good one' - where 'good' means it does the job you describe above and 'poor' means it doesn't (ie it is badly designed or faulty).

post #194 of 433
11/23/12 at 3:35am
Quote:
Originally Posted by gurkey View Post

Its probably not only the amps but the processing, which will differentiate the AVRs.
AVRs are more of a multi media computer nowadays, and we really don't know for sure, how much of that processing influences the SQ of such a unit, no matter, what the manufacturers say.
Another relevant point is, how sophisticated the built in room correction system is and how good a job it does.

I suspect that if you use the receivers with no special features engaged and without using any the 456 flavors of room correction, some of which allegedly don't produce consistent results from setup attempt to setup attempt, they sound very much the same.

The surround decoders are usually based on licensed chips of which there only a few distinct designs and probably carefully controlled by the organizations that license them, so they are probably pretty consistent performers as well.

When pressed to their limits, such as handling speakers with unusually bad impedance curves, there may be some actual audible differences.

Is there any purpose in comparing $50 buck amps to $1000 amps? That would depend. If the $1000 amp puts out 1000 wpc and the $50 amp puts out 25, then they are probably going to sound different if you are trying to drive a big subwoofer with 100s of watts, which can happen in actual use. @20 watts per channel there is no reason why they need to sound different.
post #195 of 433
11/23/12 at 4:27am
this topic has grown more silly and chaotic than necessary.


why do amps sound different?
because not all speakers sound the same.

if you've got a speaker that sounds like this /
and an amplifier that sounds like this \
...put those two together and they line up flat like this |


the only other question is..
why dont we make ONE speaker and sell it to everybody?
there is ONE white bread, but they dont all taste the same.

and when it is time to upgrade the last version with a new one.. not everybody is going to go out there and buy the new one.
that means not everybody will have the same ONE speaker, because some are new and some are old.
(the spreading happens again right here)
post #196 of 433
11/23/12 at 4:48am
Need a BDT for pairing difficult speakers with various amplifiers, probably done but I haven't seen them. I wouldn't be surprised if there were only differences between the most difficult speakers but then again...
I wouldn't be surprised if difficult speakers were handled better by relatively inexpensive amps.
Edited by Theresa - 11/23/12 at 5:13am
post #197 of 433
11/23/12 at 5:54am
Quote:
Originally Posted by anwaypasible View Post

why do amps sound different?

why dont we make ONE speaker and sell it to everybody?

Adjust the price of a gramophone for inflation, put a price:performance figure on it, and you'll have the basic answer.

Nothing new below, just elaborating on the point that everything has its limits so determine what your needs are, not someone else's, plan accordingly and ignore everything else:

It's often said that on average amps only put out 5, 10, 20 watts or whatever. That's true but does it mean the most that's needed is 20 watts? Depends on what you're looking for. Recordings can have 10, 20 dB or more of peak to average ratio and if playback is occurring at an average of 10 watts, a 10 dB peak will need 100 watts, and a 20 dB peak a whole kilowatt. The question now is whether the system owner plays recordings with this dynamic range at that output level, but the fact remains that if playback is to resemble a live performance then there can be no audible clipping.

I've heard people say over and over that they never run their amp into clipping but where's the proof without having done an A/B comparison between two amps that have different maximum output while using a recording with known characteristics? (yes we do that) When people assess the audio quality of playback equipment without realizing that clipping is built into the recordings in use, and there's plenty of that, it's proof enough to me that the bar is in the wrong place:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Gmex_4hreQ

Note that according to internet lore the CD loudness war began the mid 90s, but there's clipping in the first Led Zeppelin box set (a remaster) and the first Texas Tornados album (a new release in which peak level is -3 dBFS though it's clipped throughout). These are from 1990 and I wouldn't be surprised if there are others.
post #198 of 433
11/23/12 at 7:04pm
I already voted in the poll. When talking about amps, they do more than pass power along. Slew rate, frequency range, ablilty to recover after a momentary overload, damping factor, response to changes in line voltage, distortion handling ect. For me a good amp is one that fits my budget : ) These thing differ between amp and in some cases make an audible difference. How much of a difference is the real question. Why do people even use the nebulous term accuracy when talking about amps or speakers. Unless you were at the final mix of a recording or movie, you have no ideal of the accuray of the home system reproduction compared to what the sound engineers intended: let's stop throwing around nebulous terms that can't be quantified.
post #199 of 433
11/24/12 at 2:22pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by derrickdj1 View Post

When talking about amps, they do more than pass power along. Slew rate, frequency range, ablilty to recover after a momentary overload, damping factor, response to changes in line voltage, distortion handling ect.

All that is reflected in measurements previously mentioned. There's no useful information in a damping factor number that frequency response graphs at various loads aren't already showing, and slew rate is just another way of almost answering "what's the upper frequency limit at maximum output" aka the power bandwidth in an amp's case. (A high-speed IC can have a slew rate that's astronomical compared to any power amp's, but it's not very useful device if connected to a speaker since its voltage rise doesn't have to travel far.)

Line voltage sag only means that the amp's maximum output is reduced. Certification bodies require that an appliance work properly within +/- 10% of nominal voltage however maximum output is measured with the line voltage regulated to the nominal voltage, i.e. 120V in N.A., for consistency and repeatability. (Some pundits have said there's something wrong with that but without regulation which would you use as the standard - a house next to the street's transformer and with the entertainment system's AC outlet six feet from the service entrance, or a large 100+ year old building such as a factory-turned-loft that's still using its original wiring and the lights dim to romantic level when someone in the kitchen uses the toaster?)

Amps handle loads not distortion, they generate that and it's shown under THD, IMD, and distortion spectrum if provided though as mentioned if THD is below audible limit then all harmonics are below it too.

In summary, if the amp does everything right when operating at its maximum *continuous* output and has overload protection for situations beyond that then it's practically certain that the amp won't do anything wrong at lower output when it's not being stressed, and measurements are usually taken at lower level such as 1W or 10W as well as maximum.
post #200 of 433
11/24/12 at 4:05pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovinthehd View Post

I had to vote doubtful but perhaps...if Bob Carver could tweak his amps to match other particular amplifiers' characteristics there are by definition differences.

Nope. All the "Carver tests" mean is that Bob Carver is a good showman, and capable of hookwinking technically illiterate audio journalists and getting them to write articles that are (unintentionally) hilarious to people who can read between the lines.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick @ Anthem View Post

With the human experience factored back in and considering that most cars still run on fuel I'd say that cars have more in common with musicians than amps.

I love that line!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick @ Anthem View Post

*** Certification bodies require that an appliance work properly within +/- 10% of nominal voltage however maximum output is measured with the line voltage regulated to the nominal voltage, i.e. 120V in N.A., for consistency and repeatability. ***

Here you've hit on a big difference between amplifiers that is relevant and material to intelligent audio consumers.

Many amp makers/marketers are too cheap, lazy, or callous to submit their amps to certification bodies (OSHA-approved NRTL) to verify their electrical safety, etc.

That failure will make smart consumers favor amps from more responsible companies, such as Anthem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick @ Anthem View Post

It's often said that on average amps only put out 5, 10, 20 watts or whatever. That's true but does it mean the most that's needed is 20 watts? Depends on what you're looking for. Recordings can have 10, 20 dB or more of peak to average ratio and if playback is occurring at an average of 10 watts, a 10 dB peak will need 100 watts, and a 20 dB peak a whole kilowatt.

True, but one basically never listens at a 10W average level. In a typical room, with reasonably efficient speakers, a very loud 80dB average level is going to require quite a bit less than 1W at the listening position. (Especially when one considers that in real rooms one doesn't lose 6dB SPL for every doubling of distance. That only happens outdoors or in anechoic spaces.) So that 20dB peak really requires less than 100W of power.

True, some people use really inefficient speakers. And others suck the life out of their rooms with "acoustic treatment products." And, I suppose, some people do sit a football field away from their loudspeakers, I guess. But as a general rule most people way overestimate how much power they "need."
post #201 of 433
11/24/12 at 5:53pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by DS-21 
Many amp makers/marketers are too cheap, lazy, or callous to submit their amps to certification bodies (OSHA-approved NRTL) to verify their electrical safety, etc.
That failure will make smart consumers favor amps from more responsible companies, such as Anthem.

Oh really... rolleyes.gif
Could you kindly confirm that subject by listing the affected brands and respective models..

Are you aware that the major sellers (brick/mortar & internet) will not handle a product if it doesn't have the required agency certifications. Also if such a product does exist and develops technical/safety issues, the litigation expenses defending product liability lawsuits would bankrupt them..


Just my $0.02... wink.gif
post #202 of 433
11/24/12 at 6:48pm
"Here you've hit on a big difference between amplifiers that is relevant and material to intelligent audio consumers.

Many amp makers/marketers are too cheap, lazy, or callous to submit their amps to certification bodies (OSHA-approved NRTL) to verify their electrical safety, etc.

That failure will make smart consumers favor amps from more responsible companies, such as Anthem."



If that's the case then why did the Anthem P5 amp I demoed on an all Aerial system sound so much worse then the BAT VK-6200 on the same system. The Anthem has more power yet sounded muddy in the mid bass and sibilance on dialog. Once the less powerful BAT was substituted in whole new ballgame. smile.gif
post #203 of 433
11/24/12 at 6:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mankite View Post

"Here you've hit on a big difference between amplifiers that is relevant and material to intelligent audio consumers.

Many amp makers/marketers are too cheap, lazy, or callous to submit their amps to certification bodies (OSHA-approved NRTL) to verify their electrical safety, etc.

That failure will make smart consumers favor amps from more responsible companies, such as Anthem."



If that's the case then why did the Anthem P5 amp I demoed on an all Aerial system sound so much worse then the BAT VK-6200 on the same system. The Anthem has more power yet sounded muddy in the mid bass and sibilance on dialog. Once the less powerful BAT was substituted in whole new ballgame. smile.gif

Because your comment is a non-sequitur? As many of your posts have been for that matter. Just for fun, please explain what an all-Aerial is in the first place, and if that was your normal speaker setup in your own room at the time and only changing out amps?

Muddy midbass seems like a fault of your sub/speaker setup in any case. Sibilance could be source, too. Specifics please.
post #204 of 433
11/24/12 at 7:07pm
All Aerial system was (2) LR5's, (1) CC5, (2) SW12's, (2) LR3's. Nothing changed but the amp. Maybe there's just a simpler explanation. The Anthem is crap. I don't see why the other side gets so angry. I'm not a defender of what I own, these are my honest unbiased observations. I've owned a few pieces I didn't like and I never defended any of them. This thread has made me change my signature. smile.gif
post #205 of 433
11/24/12 at 7:11pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mankite View Post

All Aerial system was (2) LR5's, (1) CC5, (2) SW12's, (2) LR3's. Nothing changed but the amp. Maybe there's just a simpler explanation. The Anthem is crap. I don't see why the other side gets so angry. I'm not a defender of what I own, these are my honest unbiased observations. I've owned a few pieces I didn't like and I never defended any of them. This thread has made me change my signature. smile.gif

You think too much of yourself for one thing. Your description of an Aerial system still makes me go looking. So this is your speaker system of choice and was installed in your own room, and not just set up with simply a change of amps, but you recalibrated as well?
post #206 of 433
11/24/12 at 7:12pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mankite View Post

All Aerial system was (2) LR5's, (1) CC5, (2) SW12's, (2) LR3's. Nothing changed but the amp. Maybe there's just a simpler explanation. The Anthem is crap. I don't see why the other side gets so angry. I'm not a defender of what I own, these are my honest unbiased observations. I've owned a few pieces I didn't like and I never defended any of them. This thread has made me change my signature. smile.gif

"honest and unbiased observations" - not doubting you at all, but from a science perspective they are not valid because they were sited and not repeated.  Which happens to be the case for most people when the change equipment.

post #207 of 433
11/24/12 at 7:16pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by M Code View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by DS-21 
Many amp makers/marketers are too cheap, lazy, or callous to submit their amps to certification bodies (OSHA-approved NRTL) to verify their electrical safety, etc.
That failure will make smart consumers favor amps from more responsible companies, such as Anthem.

Oh really... rolleyes.gif
Could you kindly confirm that subject by listing the affected brands and respective models..

Are you aware that the major sellers (brick/mortar & internet) will not handle a product if it doesn't have the required agency certifications. Also if such a product does exist and develops technical/safety issues, the litigation expenses defending product liability lawsuits would bankrupt them..


Just my $0.02... wink.gif

A small sampling of brands who offer products that fail to have NRTL electrical safety certification: Outlaw, Emotiva, Rotel, Cambridge Audio, Music Hall, Peachtree Audio.
Even on clear knockoff parts. For example, Outlaw's cheap knockoff of the old NHT A1 monobloc is uncertified, while the original carried proper safety certification.

(Though some resellers don't seem to get the required certs, either. For example, I've seen Rotel ICEpower amps without FCC logos indicating compliance with Part B. That's a clear violation of federal regs.)

NRTL certification isn't "required," mind. I think it should be, but it isn't. Better amp makers/marketers get it done.
post #208 of 433
11/24/12 at 7:17pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovinthehd View Post

You think too much of yourself for one thing. Your description of an Aerial system still makes me go looking. So this is your speaker system of choice and was installed in your own room, and not just set up with simply a change of amps, but you recalibrated as well?

I never owned the system. I drove an hour to demo it. Spent about two hours there.
post #209 of 433
11/24/12 at 7:20pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by primetimeguy View Post

"honest and unbiased observations" - not doubting you at all, but from a science perspective they are not valid because they were sited and not repeated.  Which happens to be the case for most people when the change equipment.

I'm in this hobby because I enjoy it not to prove anything. I guess either the amp was faulty or it was placebo effect again. You guys crack me up. It's like your the Mormons and we are Atheists. You don't see us going door to door trying to sway you. lol
post #210 of 433
11/24/12 at 7:26pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mankite View Post

"Here you've hit on a big difference between amplifiers that is relevant and material to intelligent audio consumers.

Many amp makers/marketers are too cheap, lazy, or callous to submit their amps to certification bodies (OSHA-approved NRTL) to verify their electrical safety, etc.

That failure will make smart consumers favor amps from more responsible companies, such as Anthem."



If that's the case then why did the Anthem P5 amp I demoed on an all Aerial system sound so much worse then the BAT VK-6200 on the same system. The Anthem has more power yet sounded muddy in the mid bass and sibilance on dialog. Once the less powerful BAT was substituted in whole new ballgame. smile.gif

What is "mudddy mid bass"?
And how would that change amp to amp?
(assuming all the other items in the food chain the same, speaker&location, pre-pro, EQ, your MLP, etc)

Now I'm curious, in your room what is your bass decay time 20-200hz?
Any waterfall plots to share?
I'm sure that will show what's really happening.

Now, "sibilance on dialog" ... I had to look up http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sibilant
Quote:
Sibilant
Sibilance is a manner of articulation of fricative and affricate consonants, made by directing a stream of air with the tongue towards the sharp edge of the teeth, which are held close together; a consonant that uses sibilance may be called a sibilant. Examples of sibilants are the consonants at the beginning of the English words sip, zip, ship, chip, and Jeep, and the second consonant in vision. The symbols in the International Phonetic Alphabet used to denote the sibilant sounds in these words are, respectively, [.s] [z] [ʃ] [tʃ] [dʒ] [ʒ]. (The sounds [tʃ] [dʒ], as in chip and Jeep, are affricates; the rest are fricatives.) Sibilants have a characteristically intense sound, which accounts for their non-linguistic use in getting one's attention (e.g. calling someone using "sssst!" or quieting someone using "shhhh!").

In the alveolar hissing sibilants [.s] and [z], the back of the tongue forms a narrow channel (is grooved) to focus the stream of air more intensely, resulting in a high pitch. With the hushing sibilants (occasionally termed shibilants), such as English [ʃ], [tʃ], [ʒ], and [dʒ], the tongue is flatter, and the resulting pitch lower.[citation needed][we need cite that they are not grooved]

Sibilants may also be called stridents, a term which refers to the perceptual intensity of the sound of a sibilant consonant, or obstacle fricatives/affricates, which refers to the critical role of the teeth in producing the sound as an obstacle to the airstream. Non-sibilant fricatives and affricates produce their characteristic sound directly with the tongue or lips etc. and the place of contact in the mouth, without secondary involvement of the teeth.

The characteristic intensity of sibilants means that small variations in tongue shape and position are perceivable, with the result that there are a large number of sibilant types that contrast in various languages.

Acoustics

Sibilants are louder than their non-sibilant counterparts, and most of their acoustic energy occurs at higher frequencies than non-sibilant fricatives. [.s] has the most acoustic strength at around 8,000 Hz, but can reach as high as 10,000 Hz. [ʃ] has the bulk of its acoustic energy at around 4,000 Hz, but can extend up to around 8,000 Hz.

So you are saying that somehow the Anthem amp was smart enough to only affect dialog like that? Wow.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Receivers, Amps, and Processors
This thread is locked  

AVS Top Picks

AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › Can YOU hear the difference between amplifiers??